Nikon FF lineup - what Nikon shooters really want?

I am DX shooter and planning to move to FX. I see a a lot of rant on current Nikon FF lineup and I was wondering if it is due to the fact that the Nikon FF line is not well thought out in terms of mix and needs for various type of photographers?

Should Nikon plan a line that fits needs and budgets of photographers instead of trying to get into compromise of sorts? I guess what people really want is something like below on a high level so that they can pick their camera of choice.

But if Nikon does something like that, will they do harm to their sales with some lower price products eating away into the higher priced ones? With sensor performance so close these days (D600 and D800 has shown just that) the only differentiator could be features. Is it not possible to create a line that is segregated by features that people can select and buy as per their needs and type of shooting?

Here's a line I could think of after doing some reading on the FF forum here. I have kept the D4 and D3X out. I have added UK price as a guide.

Pros - FF users and and DX users upgrading from D3XX/D7XXX

D800/E upgrade - Whenever it comes with better DR, Wifi, GPS - £2600

D800 E - Top quality IQ as of today - £2250

D800 - Top quality IQ as of today after D800E (For pros who has IQ and big prints as the top priority and not speed) - £1950

D710 / D750 - Same spec and build as D800E, but with 20/24MP and higher FPS as D700, Wifi, GPS (For pros who needs speed and less MP) - £1800

I'm not sure I follow, but as a long time DX (D200/D300) user and now FX (D700/D800e) user, I can tell you the few things that I see as missing, or basically what bothers me.

First off, note the bodies I've been shooting (since 2007). Prosumer bodies, I'd guess you'd call them. All of them with grips, and the last three with large batteries (for both capacity and frame rate).

Essentially I'd prefer D3s / D4, but choose not to spend that much money. Although I've become a convert to the pixel count of the D800e.

Before I got the D800e, I used either a D300 or a D700. I did not find that they mixed well at the same venue, even though the bodies were nearly identical. The D300 pretty much became a specialty camera used for wildlife, and the D700 for everything else.

Now I have the D800e/D700 combo, though I don't use the D700 very much. (Perhaps because the D800e is still newish after 6 months, but mostly because the D800e outclasses the D700 IQ in a lot of ways.)

What I, and a lot of people in the D300 or D700 camp wanted, was basically a ... D400 and a D7xx. Same body, for SURE. Same frame rate (!) And about 24mp. What we got was ... an apparent abandonment of the pro DX line, and a really-really-nice-but-too-slow D700 replacement.

Most of the time I can live without the speed of my D700 with grip, but when I shoot the D700 back-to-back with the D800e, the difference is glaring there.

I'm not sure what I want is quite as important at this time as what I'm currently willing to buy. And I'm still willing to buy another camera. Not a $6000 camera (which has too few MP for me at this point, but which I'd really like at $3500...)

I feel the sensor difference between the D800e and my D300. I feel the pixel density difference (DX crop mode of the D800e) too. I want, and am willing to actually buy, a D400, assuming it is at (or above) 24mp and can get to 8fps. I'd be using it for wildlife, and some sports. Maybe Nikon thinks I'll eventually buy a D4, but I'd have much rather had a D3s than a D700 with grip, and I never bought one of those.

Nope, not going to buy a D7100/D600/D610 body either, regardless of the sensor in it.

Nikon, my money is still in my wallet, and it sounds like you could use some of it.

For the serious, but amateur action shooter (e.g. someone who isn't going to drop $6000 on a D4), it is clear that Nikon has no great FX or DX offering where they used to have both the D700 and D300.

In FX, there is no current body that has great AF, a good sized buffer, D800-type build and can do at least 8fps for less than $3000 (e.g. a 24MP D700 upgrade, often referred to as a D710 or D750). Put the D600 sensor in the D800 body and shutter and AF with a new EXPEED chip that can process 24MP at 8fps. If Nikon wants to know why I haven't bought a new body in 6 years, this is why. They haven't made anything since the D700/D300 that is semi-affordable (e.g. not $6k) and is optimized for sports/action shooting.

I would agree but the D800 in 1.2 crop mode works very well for me for action. Way better than I ever expected. Given that I mostly shoot in AF-C + focus priority, the real difference in FPS compared to the D300 is hardly felt. But with a flip of a switch the camera transforms into an awesome camera for still, close-up or whatever does not require FPS.

As a non-sports photographer (amateur, but advanced) I wanted an upgrade to the D700 - mainly in the areas of viewfinder and sensor. I eventually got a D800 in spite of the 36MP and poor live view implementation.

What I want is:

- D750: A D800 body with the D600 sensor and non-line skipping live view

- Mirrorless FX: Tired of the focusing accuracy problems with fast glass, either in AF or MF mode. Give me some high quality compact primes (f/2 or 2.8 would be fine) that are sharp wide open across the frame and get slightly better when stopped down. For the vast majority of what I shoot f/2.8 is just fine. This would be a fantastic landscape camera that didn't need focus tracking, high FPS, high end video, etc.

I've been building up a m43 kit recently and, although it's far from a perfect system, it has some attributes associated with not having a mirror that are really attractive (like accurate AF, great ability to focus with MF lenses, gaining up the image in low light, being able to see the exact DOF, etc.).

I would like to see a D800 body wrapped around a D4 sensor, with a somewhat faster frame rate than the current D800. This would prompt me to spend money on a Nikon DSLR in 2014. I would like to own this action-shooting D800 variant, plus a D800E for landscapes and seascapes.

Yes, I will, probably, buy a D800E, anyway, but I am in less of a hurry to buy a 36MP landscape/seascape DSLR.

Secondly, a refresh of the Coolpix A would be nice, if it could be made a bit more "professional" in its operation, such as full capability with Speedlights and the SU800, so that the SB- or SU-unit in the flash shoe can command off-camera Speedlights, and/or the pop-up flash could act as a Commander. Oh, and the "Coolpix" label should not be applied to this pro-oriented camera.

I'm not sure I follow, but as a long time DX (D200/D300) user and now FX (D700/D800e) user, I can tell you the few things that I see as missing, or basically what bothers me.

First off, note the bodies I've been shooting (since 2007). Prosumer bodies, I'd guess you'd call them. All of them with grips, and the last three with large batteries (for both capacity and frame rate).

Essentially I'd prefer D3s / D4, but choose not to spend that much money. Although I've become a convert to the pixel count of the D800e.

Before I got the D800e, I used either a D300 or a D700. I did not find that they mixed well at the same venue, even though the bodies were nearly identical. The D300 pretty much became a specialty camera used for wildlife, and the D700 for everything else.

Now I have the D800e/D700 combo, though I don't use the D700 very much. (Perhaps because the D800e is still newish after 6 months, but mostly because the D800e outclasses the D700 IQ in a lot of ways.)

What I, and a lot of people in the D300 or D700 camp wanted, was basically a ... D400 and a D7xx. Same body, for SURE. Same frame rate (!) And about 24mp. What we got was ... an apparent abandonment of the pro DX line, and a really-really-nice-but-too-slow D700 replacement.

Most of the time I can live without the speed of my D700 with grip, but when I shoot the D700 back-to-back with the D800e, the difference is glaring there.

I'm not sure what I want is quite as important at this time as what I'm currently willing to buy. And I'm still willing to buy another camera. Not a $6000 camera (which has too few MP for me at this point, but which I'd really like at $3500...)

I feel the sensor difference between the D800e and my D300. I feel the pixel density difference (DX crop mode of the D800e) too. I want, and am willing to actually buy, a D400, assuming it is at (or above) 24mp and can get to 8fps. I'd be using it for wildlife, and some sports. Maybe Nikon thinks I'll eventually buy a D4, but I'd have much rather had a D3s than a D700 with grip, and I never bought one of those.

Nope, not going to buy a D7100/D600/D610 body either, regardless of the sensor in it.

Nikon, my money is still in my wallet, and it sounds like you could use some of it.

I would like to see a D800 body wrapped around a D4 sensor, with a somewhat faster frame rate than the current D800. This would prompt me to spend money on a Nikon DSLR in 2014. I would like to own this action-shooting D800 variant, plus a D800E for landscapes and seascapes.

Yes, I will, probably, buy a D800E, anyway, but I am in less of a hurry to buy a 36MP landscape/seascape DSLR.

Secondly, a refresh of the Coolpix A would be nice, if it could be made a bit more "professional" in its operation, such as full capability with Speedlights and the SU800, so that the SB- or SU-unit in the flash shoe can command off-camera Speedlights, and/or the pop-up flash could act as a Commander. Oh, and the "Coolpix" label should not be applied to this pro-oriented camera.

Nikon is missing a market they created with the D700, and which Canon just grabbed with the 5D3. They are doing the same with the D300's line, no successor there either. Something is really wrong with Nikon recently, their pursuit of selling as many dslrs as Canon is leading them astray and making them lose much of their original support. They still make great cameras, the D800E and the D600 are excellent, albeit the flaws, but they need to concentrate on what most people that need good bodies are looking for. I think Canon has now a more balanced line-up body/pixel-wise, but their sensors are not yet up to Nikon/Sony levels.

All these cameras are great on paper and great when they work. When they develop problems, by design or other, we want to be treated with respect and honestly and not see our purchases devalue by huge amounts because the company cannot accept responsibility for a failure.

After that is solved, we may discuss if this or that feature is desirable, which lens is better for which use and body, etc.